Support NeoGAF

[Nealand Liquor]

I don't have the citation readily available (and just woke up and too lazy to search for it) but I remember fact checking a study that found when riots start it is usually planned and perpetuated by gang members/cartels/organised crime syndicates simply taking advantage of the situation.
Just something to keep in mind before blaming the regular citizens for the riot.

 

[Malyse]

Dems is jokes, doe..

This isn't directed at you, k?

Threats against former Presidents and certain other persons

a) Whoever knowingly and willfully threatens to kill, kidnap, or inflict bodily harm upon—

(1) a former President or a member of the immediate family of a former President;
(2) a member of the immediate family of the President, the President-elect, the Vice President, or the Vice President-elect;
(3) a major candidate for the office of President or Vice President, or a member of the immediate family of such candidate; or
(4) a person protected by the Secret Service under section 3056 (a)(6);​

shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.

(b) As used in this section—

(1) the term “immediate family” means—

(A) with respect to subsection (a)(1) of this section, the wife of a former President during his lifetime, the widow of a former President until her death or remarriage, and minor children of a former President until they reach sixteen years of age; and
(B) with respect to subsection (a)(2) and (a)(3) of this section, a person to whom the President, President-elect, Vice President, Vice President-elect, or major candidate for the office of President or Vice President—

(i) is related by blood, marriage, or adoption; or
(ii) stands in loco parentis;​

(2) the term “major candidate for the office of President or Vice President” means a candidate referred to in subsection (a)(7) ofsection 3056 of this title; and
(3) the terms “President-elect” and “Vice President-elect” have the meanings given those terms in section 871 (b) of this title​

Basically, it's a felony to threaten the President's family. Fuck his joke.

Why are you asking an irrelevant-baiting question? I do not live in the past, nor does my department. Hammering or living in the past clouds the present. It's time to move on.



So, the union telling officers to follow the rules and policy is an act of disregard? (Yes, I read the part on responding to calls for service... and that the hierarchy still applies if the urgency is there)

Are you really that willfully ignorant?

 

[Brolic Gaoler]

If you're saying the police are subconsciously judging blacks as criminals, then do you really believe that looting is going to fix that image?

It's not just police, it's society at large. It's the whole "criminal black male" phenomenon/ stereotype.

 

[marrec]

A conspiracy isn't necessary, it's a disorganized phenomenon that exists on every level and continues to go unchecked.

This is the part that's hard for people to understand. It's not like Cops are especially racist or anything, they're just a powerful microcosm of society that happens to have the ability to use deadly force.

The fact that a bunch of black people are getting harmed/killed is emergent of the underlying problems.

 

[Flo_Evans]

I think you'd have to be blind, ignorant, or just plain biased to not see the police have a different response to crime in black areas than white.

 

[SierraOne]

It is quite relevant nor was it a bating question. The past does affect the present and to say it doesn't is ridiculous. I am asking for your opinion. It's a simple question.


What does Obama have to do with it?

It's clearly a baited question. State your point on the relevance.. or let me guess, the act of prejudice under the color of law decades ago still resonates today? No, not where I stand.

 

[Potato Marshal]

What does Obama have to do with it?

I'm saying I'm getting tired of people making wide sweeping arguments about how the entire country is inherently racist and trying to keep blacks down.

 

[besada]

Why are you asking an irrelevant-baiting question? I do not live in the past, nor does my department. Hammering or living in the past clouds the present. It's time to move on.

You've made assertions about your department while making it impossible to verify those assertions. If you're not going to provide evidence, or at least the city in which your department resides so others can do the homework, then I'm going to have to ask you to stop making the assertions. Your word on the spotlessness of your department really isn't good enough.

 

[TheChocolateWar]

I think you'd have to be blind, ignorant, or just plain biased to not see the police have a different response to crime in black areas than white.

That may possibly have more to do with the type of crime being encountered in those areas as a result of socio-economic issues more than ingrained racism. One does not necessitate the other.

 

[sphagnum]

If you're saying the police are subconsciously judging blacks as criminals, then do you really believe that looting is going to fix that image?

No, and if you had read my previous posts you'd see that I'm not in favor of looting.

Taking power fixes the problem.

 

[Archaix]

Why are you asking an irrelevant-baiting question? I do not live in the past, nor does my department. Hammering or living in the past clouds the present. It's time to move on.

Yeah, it's time to move on. Unfortunately we won't have to wait long until another cop murders another kid for the crime of being black, but then that will have been in the past too so we won't have to discuss that either. Convenient.

Ignoring problems of the past, or pretending that actions of recent decades is the distant past, is not helping the situation at all. Neither is ignoring a widespread problem of today and pretending it's the past.

 

[Brolic Gaoler]

You've made assertions about your department while making it impossible to verify those assertions. If you're not going to provide evidence, or at least the city in which your department resides so others can do the homework, then I'm going to have to ask you to stop making the assertions. Your word on the spotlessness of your department really isn't good enough.

To be fair, he didn't say his department is spotless. He said there's no war on "brown people" there. And I all honesty saying all departments have a war on minority groups is exactly the type of generalizing that others are so vehemently against here.


There's definitely an issue, research shows that, but not EVERY cop or department is doing it.

 

[besada]

To be fair, he didn't say his department is spotless. He said there's no war on "brown people" there.

Fair enough. The rest of it stands, though.

 

[Malyse]

It's clearly a baited question. State your point on the relevance.. or let me guess, the act of prejudice under the color of law decades ago still resonates today? No, not where I stand.

It's cute how you can't give a city name.

Yeah, it's time to move on. Unfortunately we won't have to wait long until another cop murders another kid for the crime of being black, but then that will have been in the past too so we won't have to discuss that either. Convenient.

Dunno. We're moving at a pretty steady clip. We've had, what, three nationally covered in the last month? Maybe their trying to beat the "one killed every 28 hours" high score for 2014.

 

[benjipwns]

I'm not in favor of looting.

Taking power fixes the problem.

 

[Kurdel]

I think you'd have to be blind, ignorant, or just plain biased to not see the police have a different response to crime in black areas than white.

Don't you think how a community sees and interacts with it's police force is in and of itself a motor for conflict?

Like in this study, where the poorer black neighbourhood saw black officers as being better than white officers, even if there was no practical difference between their approaches?

But the middle class mixed neighbourhoods saw them more as a united force, instead of black or white.

One thing that is clear from this study is no one wants to a have segregated police forces, but if that could be of help with interactions in poor neighbourhoods (black or white), it could be a pragmatic way to bring down police/civilian conflict with racial tensions as a fuel.

 

[Weiss]

If you're saying the police are subconsciously judging blacks as criminals, then do you really believe that looting is going to fix that image?

Obviously not, but that's not why riots happen. These people live in a system that views them as subhuman, where cops routinely get away with murdering them. What the hell are they supposed to do if the law isn't going to help them?

 

[sphagnum]

You know sometimes I feel like I just need to change this avatar to a pure hammer and sickle before people realize what perspective I'm posting from. Apparently it's currently too subtle.

 

[Enzom21]

It's clearly a baited question. State your point on the relevance.. or let me guess, the act of prejudice under the color of law decades ago still resonates today? No, not where I stand.

Explain to me how it is a baited question. You can simply say yes or no, it is not a difficult question to answer.

I'm saying I'm getting tired of people making wide sweeping arguments about how the entire country is inherently racist and trying to keep blacks down.

And talking about how the president is black is somehow a counter to that? It is a lazy argument often made by racists trying to point out that racism is dead.

 

[Mesousa]

I'm saying I'm getting tired of people making wide sweeping arguments about how the entire country is inherently racist and trying to keep blacks down.

So you get tired of hearing the truth basically?

 

[Omegasquash]

I'm saying I'm getting tired of people making wide sweeping arguments about how the entire country is inherently racist and trying to keep blacks down.

It...it has a foundation in racism. Slavery. Segregation. Stop and Frisk.

The point being made isn't that every-person-in-America-is-racist. The point being made is that we have been exposed to stereotypes throughout our lives that frame black men as criminals. Racism does not have to be overt and in your face, complete with burning crosses and hanged men in trees.

Racism is, at its core, the belief that skin color makes people different. We are trained to think that way from a young age.

 

[MIMIC]

This is a great social media movement. More:

'If they gunned me down, what photo would you use?'

After the fatal shooting of an unarmed black teenager by police in the US city of St. Louis, many in the African-American community are asking (link is external) mainstream media, "If they gunned me down, what photo would you use?" to draw attention to what they call the media's misrepresentation of black youth.

Michael Brown, 18, was shot and killed by police Saturday after what authorities say was a "police altercation". While some media initally showed photos of Brown in a cap and gown from his high school graduation, others are using a photo of him throwing up what some are interpreting (link is external) as a "gang sign".

Objecting to the image choice, many have posted two photos with #IfTheyGunnedMeDown, asking the media which photo they would choose if they were unarmed and killed by police

Aljazeera

 

[TheChocolateWar]

It...it has a foundation in racism. Slavery. Segregation. Stop and Frisk.

The point being made isn't that every-person-in-America-is-racist. The point being made is that we have been exposed to stereotypes throughout our lives that frame black men as criminals. Racism does not have to be overt and in your face, complete with burning crosses and hanged men in trees.

Racism is, at its core, the belief that skin color makes people different. We are trained to think that way from a young age.

Stop and frisk really is not an institution of racism, and if anything you can file a federal law suit against a police officer who innitiates a stop and frisk based on race.

 

[abadguy]

I've always wondered what happens to all the racists, misogynists, homophobes, and bigots that were punted out of GAF. I've always speculated that they run off and form those conservative news aggregates, fringe blogs, some obscure GAF-hating subreddit, or are forced into Lurker Hell where they try to communicate with us through YouTube comments like evil spirits from the grave.

They go back to /pol/.

 

[SierraOne]

You've made assertions about your department while making it impossible to verify those assertions. If you're not going to provide evidence, or at least the city in which your department resides so others can do the homework, then I'm going to have to ask you to stop making the assertions. Your word on the spotlessness of your department really isn't good enough.

To what degree did I state that my department is "spotless"? Such a utopian silly department does not exist, nevermind a major department, I merely stated the culture present does not showcase such in any manner, and the general orders and department policies explicitly forbid such overtly discriminate mantra. If you want to PM me for proof, so be it.

Are you really that willfully ignorant?

Ad-hominem isn't going to help your argument.

 

[Vicetrailia]

I'm saying I'm getting tired of people making wide sweeping arguments about how the entire country is inherently racist and trying to keep blacks down.

Just as you are tired, black people are also tired of being subjected to racism. Can you not understand this?

 

[Nesotenso]

So you get tired of hearing the truth basically?

you seriously need your head examined. Your posting history is always tinged with the assertion that America is just racist down to its core, that there is some organized or concerted effort to oppress people of color.

It...it has a foundation in racism. Slavery. Segregation. Stop and Frisk.
The point being made is that we have been exposed to stereotypes throughout our lives that frame black men as criminals. Racism does not have to be overt and in your face, complete with burning crosses and hanged men in trees.

Racism is, at its core, the belief that skin color makes people different. We are trained to think that way from a young age.

agree with everything here.

 

[Potato Marshal]

Obviously not, but that's not why riots happen. These people live in a system that views them as subhuman, where cops routinely get away with murdering them. What the hell are they supposed to do if the law isn't going to help them?

Then this is just going to be an endless cycle, if they feel they are unfairly being treated and branded as criminals, then obviously looting and rioting is going to reinforce that notion. And let's not kid ourselves here, many of the people looting right now isn't doing it for "justice" or to "have their voices heard", they're just looking for an excuse for free stuff.

 

[benjipwns]

and if anything you can file a federal law suit against a police officer who innitiates a stop and frisk based on race.

Oh, well, that's easy enough.

 

[SierraOne]

Yeah, it's time to move on. Unfortunately we won't have to wait long until another cop murders another kid for the crime of being black...

Why do use emotion-sensationalist mantra to state a case? Are you ignoring the given scenario of a young man assualting an officer? Or is that not a crime?

 

[TheChocolateWar]

Oh, well, that's easy enough.

Sure, if you have 50 dollars there are plenty of law graduates who would be happy to take you pro bono. Heck, some of us specialize in this kind of case.

 

[Archaix]

Why do use emotion-sensationalist mantra to state a case? Are you ignoring the given scenario of a young man assualting an officer? Or is that not a crime?

No, that is a crime. Unlike a police officer murdering an unarmed citizen. That's the part that's completely okay. And despite the fact that it happens with regularity, it is somehow not a sign of a systemic problem.

I am going to be completely honest with you: You are a part of the problem. Refusal to acknowledge is not as serious as actively taking part in these activities, but burying your head in the sand absolutely makes you one of the bad guys. You're in the wrong here for supporting this. You are a bad cop. I just want you to know that.

 

[SierraOne]

No, that is a crime. Unlike a police officer murdering an unarmed citizen. That's the part that's completely okay.

Why do you continue to hit on the aspect of being "unarmed" as if that dictates innocence?

 

[TheChocolateWar]

No, that is a crime. Unlike a police officer murdering an unarmed citizen. That's the part that's completely okay.

It is not a crime to shoot a fleeing dangerous felon.

 

[besada]

To what degree did I state that my department is "spotless"? Such a utopian silly department does not exist, nevermind a major department, I merely stated the culture present does not showcase such in any manner, and the general orders and department policies explicitly forbid such overtly discriminate mantra. If you want to PM me for proof, so be it.

You can either name your department or stop using it as an example. Entirely your choice.

 

[jhmtehgamr20xx]

So because a vocal minority is having their stances voted down by the voting majority this necessarily equates to a manifest injustice in the system itself? Just because people are vocal does not make them the majority, or even carry enough weight to have their ideas adopted by a democracy.

It just means the system is not necessarily designed for the vocal minority. Strength in numbers is a very real thing, there are extremely few (if any) societies in history where a country with a dominant population of one group has actually split the power structure to minority groups equally, and I doubt America will ever be any different.

That unfortunately doesn't leave a lot of options, and it's not in any way saying that the majority do it out of spite or anything. Just that, that's how history works and there's no evidence to say it would change anytime soon. Of course that doesn't mean they can't use the "standardized, proper channels" to some capacity, but keep in mind those same channels were in some small part-and today largely benefit due to decades of incidental legal practices-members of society who are not the vocal minority.

I'm not sure where all you people are getting the idea that I think racism doesn't exist anymore in the country. I'm not quick to jump on to blame racism for anything that happens to a black person. Yes, police brutality is a serious issue, yes it's tragic what happened to the young man, I'm just saying I don't believe in some conspiracy where police officers around the country are shooting black people for no reason.

I agree; for all the talk of bad crooked cops around here, I think people forget that at the end of the day, cops are.....also people, and sometimes you may meet a nice person who you'd never suspect is a cop. I've ran into cops in a few times in my life, being a minority myself, but things always resolve peacefully. Granted one day I could run into an asshole of an officer, but I'll deal with that bridge if (or when) I cross it.

Even with instances of police and minorities, I strongly believe a lot of times there are many incidental factors that lead to some worst-case scenarios, with race being on the lower end of the scale (if a factor at all). We all respond to situations differently though so it's not exactly fair to tell a person who's been stopped by an officer they need to feel a different way, that's up to them.

At the very least I do think having the sort of "they're all out to get me" mentality is extremely damaging to the psyche, self-defeatist and can lead to a lot of preventable issues. It's just not very healthy.

EDIT: I think I remember you making some....questionable posts.....in another thread. Your username looks familiar. I don't take back my post but it's kinda making me uneasy that we can agree on this point, even if we have two completely different reasons for doing so.

 

[Punchy4486]

Obama should comment on what is clearly a consistent and systemic problem with America and race and try to open up a dialogue on race relations in our "melting pot" country so that people can call him a race-baiting bigot that is trying to tear apart the country along racial lines again.

 

[Buzzman]

Stop and frisk really is not an institution of racism, and if anything you can file a federal law suit against a police officer who innitiates a stop and frisk based on race.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

 

[Siegcram]

It is not a crime to shoot a fleeing dangerous felon.

It should be.

 

[Kurdel]

You can either name your department or stop using it as an example. Entirely your choice.

I think wanting to keep your employers name anonymous to protect your job is a normal thing to do in our internet connected world.

In the thread about Canadian cell phone companies, I was never asked to out my employer when I was giving information.

I think if we start prohibiting people from using anecdotal evidence in threads, we won't get far. It is up to the users to determine if such an anecdote is worth considering or not.

 

[Malyse]

To what degree did I state that my department is "spotless"? Such a utopian silly department does not exist, nevermind a major department, I merely stated the culture present does not showcase such in any manner, and the general orders and department policies explicitly forbid such overtly discriminate mantra. If you want to PM me for proof, so be it.

Ad-hominem isn't going to help your argument.

Intentionally being obtuse isn't going to help yours. Have you considered that maybe it's happening and you're just in the dark? Because you being oblivious is a hell of a lot more likely than a PD that's fully on the up and up.

 

[benjipwns]

Obama should comment on what is clearly a consistent and systemic problem with America and race and try to open up a dialogue on race relations in our "melting pot" country so that people can call him a race-baiting bigot that is trying to tear apart the country along racial lines again.

"The police and rioters acted stupidly."

 

[BHZ Mayor]

you seriously need your head examined. Your posting history is always tinged with the assertion that America is just racist down to its core, that there is some organized or concerted effort to oppress people of color.



agree with everything here.

It kinda is though.

 

[Gordon Shumway]

Obama should comment on what is clearly a consistent and systemic problem with America and race and try to open up a dialogue on race relations in our "melting pot" country so that people can call him a race-baiting bigot that is trying to tear apart the country along racial lines again.

Yeah..

Spoiler

Nooooo.

 

[kirblar]

I think wanting to keep your employers name anonymous to protect your job is a normal thing to do in our internet connected world.

In the thread about Canadian cell phone companies, I was never asked to out my employer when I was giving information.

I think if we start prohibiting people from using anecdotal evidence in threads, we won't get far. It is up to the users to determine if such an anecdote is worth considering or not.

Agreed, I find it unreasonable as well.

 

[TheChocolateWar]

It should be.

That is a worthy discussion for people greater than myself. Personally, I do not like the idea of letting a dangerous person with nothing left to lose running through my neighborhood, more than happy to commit other crimes for the sake of escape to avoid 25 to life.

 

[Punchy4486]

Why do you continue to hit on the aspect of being "unarmed" as if that dictates innocence?

Not trying to be a dick, but what situation that could be applicable in this situation that justifies the use of deadly force against an unarmed guy?

Legitimate question.

 

[Fuchsdh]

Your problem is, you put too much faith in the political process. America's political system is phucked up at its core, in a very fundamental way. If disenfranchised citizens of any creed tried to take the "proper channels" to make real change for themselves in this country, they will not get a lot done. That's the reality. That's especially true if there are very few people like them on the other side of the matter (i.e in power), because an immediate sense of (superficial) relatability is now gone.

A lot of people are moreso apathetic because they realize the standardized process is not designed to benefit them, not without severe compromises that usually undermine the entire point. Just look at the joke that became Occupy Wall Street.

America's political system sure does have its issues, but when people don't actually participate they have little right to say "it's broken"--it's failing them because they fail to actually utilize it. Apathy is its own fulfilling prophecy.

 

[Mik317]

Why do you continue to hit on the aspect of being "unarmed" as if that dictates innocence?

I don't know but being unarmed seems like it would be easier to subdue the guy without fucking shooting him dead. Especially if the report of him getting on his knees with his hands up and being shot in the head anyway are true.

The point is dude didn't have to be killed. People trying to get away from that point are confusing.

The Riots are bad, yes (and probably not done by people who actually care) but that doesn't take away from the fact that another Black Kid was gunned down. Nothing past shooting back at the cop would have made him deserve that.

 

[Brolic Gaoler]

It should be.

The key word is DANGEROUS.

It is illegal to shoot a fleeing felon, however, if they are a danger to others, it is not.